I am having trouble trying to understand what the regulators mean by "power assistance" and what they believe is the purpose of putting an electric power unit on a bicycle.

I see three obvious benefits of an electric motor on a bicycle.

1/. For people who are unfit or have injuries which either prevent or limit the amount of pedaling they can do. They can either use the motor as the sole propulsion system all of the time, or when they are exhausted or their injury is acting up and preventing them pedaling, use the motor until they recover or for the remainder of the journey.

2/. To augment the natural pedal power of a fit rider to improve the overall performance of the bicycle, so that it can travel faster, both up hills and on the flat.

3/. Get people up very steep hills or against powerful headwinds.

However, it seems that the authorities are against using the power assistance in any of these ways.

Regarding benefit no.1 above, the authorities seem to be very keen on the pedelec concept, which disables the motor when the rider does not pedal, effectively preventing aging or injured people from using it, except perhaps for very short round-the-block style trips.

Next the authorities seem very keen to limit the performance envelope of a electric assist bicycle to the same as a human powered one, e.g. with a speed limit on the flat cutting out motor power above 25kph. This kills off most of benefit no 2.

The very low limit on power at 250 watts seems to put paid to benefit no 3, going up steep hills. Notwithstanding the fact that the authorities seem to have overlooked the issue of gearing and motor torque, which means that most 250watt single geared hub motors will not even output 250watts at slow speed up a steep hill, 250 watts seems too low to be useful on very steep hills, and even if it gets the bike up the hill, it will of necessity be at a very low and wobbly speed. As to dealing with a 10kph head wind, it does not look like it will do very much. Better than nothing I guess.

Whats left? Well the 250 watt electric pedelec bicycle will be ok for fit, healthy people who live in a nice flat area with little wind, who want to enjoy a little boost from time to time. Good for them.

Its the car for the rest of us.

Seems a shame to miss a great opportunity to turn a bicycle into a healthy, green, valid transportation system, as opposed to a purely recreational activity. But it looks like they are determined to cripple it, come what may.

stolennomenclature I take it you have never seen a pedelec bike in action, I have.

I am reasonably fit, I can put out 250 watts for 5 minutes or cruise along at 180 watts = 30kmh for a couple of hours.

I am riding to my climbing gym with a couple of kg in my backpack, on my ratbike, 20 year old 12kg repco superlite on the undulating cycle path that runs between Perth and Bayswater into a mild headwind.

When a young lady in street clothes, riding what looks like a hybrid with a couple of panniers of shopping enters the path 50m ahead. I expect to catch her in the next 200m as it 4%+ grade.

Except she is pedalling effortless at 70rpm and starts pulling away, I twig it is electric and give chase. Don't lose much more distance up the climb, put in the effort downhill, excess of 35kmh and pull some of the distance back, it flattens out, the headwind picks up and I am working hard to keep 30kmh and not lose the gap. Up another short climb, drop a little distance, but gain it back and more on the downhill. After 8 minutes of this I do get a good look at the bike, before she pulled off the shared path.

So a pedelec is no match for good set of legs. I beg to differ, she was carrying much more cargo and arrived at her destination in a far better (less sweaty) state that me, I had to moderate the remainder of my ride.

Take two riding home from the city along the freeway south PSP, same bike,same cargo, steady 32kmh. Spot a guy on a road bike ahead, get closer and see he is being paced by a woman on a pedelec at 30kmh. I pass and keep on riding 5km later, minor incident with bidon, I pull to side of path and sort it. They pass me again, still at a steady 30kmh.

250w is enough for an electric bike IMHO. That's enough to give a really good boost and make pedalling a bike effortless. Isn't that enough? I think the proposed rules are good.

The purist in me says who needs them? Why bother... you can go as fast or faster on a normal bike. However IMHO this is the same type of thinking that causes people who ride bikes to not understand the impediments that MHL prop up for non-riders.

So, it's easy for me to say....

I don't need one - why are you riding one you lazy so and so. Look you've taken a good bike and fitted batteries (which have a very finite life) and added electronics which go out of date, need to be repaired, and have a finite life too. Just man up and ride..

However for most people they want their life to be easy. If an electric bike makes pushbikes a valid option for them then I reckon that's great. An electric bike has the tiniest fraction of the environmental cost of running a car. What's more, the more people that ride them the more validity my calls for bike facilities will have. Also, the safer we will all be as more riders means greater safety for those riding. In addition, the user saves money for themselves and if they ride their electric bike enough they will have positive fitness outcomes which is better for everyone.

Personally we've considered one for my wife. After dropping the kids at school she has considered riding to work. Unfortunately she has to carry lots of stuff and the timelines are tight. She's tried it on her normal bike and it's too slow. With an electric bike she could make it in time and not need a shower. Hell... my commute is so hilly I'd probably try and steal it for recovery days!

nickobec wrote:stolennomenclature I take it you have never seen a pedelec bike in action, I have.

Take two riding home from the city along the freeway south PSP, same bike,same cargo, steady 32kmh. Spot a guy on a road bike ahead, get closer and see he is being paced by a woman on a pedelec at 30kmh. I pass and keep on riding 5km later, minor incident with bidon, I pull to side of path and sort it. They pass me again, still at a steady 30kmh.

But under the new proposed legislation, the pedalec power assistance would cut out completely at 25kph, so if the woman were doing 30kph, it would be entirely under her own steam.

Comedian wrote:250w is enough for an electric bike IMHO. That's enough to give a really good boost and make pedalling a bike effortless. Isn't that enough? I think the proposed rules are good.

It may well be enough if you are someone who does not have a knee injury, and can pedal continuously - but for those who do, a bike where the motor is operated by pedaling might be a tad disappointing. The electric bike laws really need to be framed to cater for everyone - and not everyone is lucky enough to be young and fit.

Actually I thought one of the main reasons for ebikes in the first place was to encourage people who did not at present ride bikes to start doing so. Many of these are older riders with health issues.

Have you ever seen an electric wheelchair that only goes when the invalid in the chair starts pedaling?

Kalgrm wrote:Pedelec means the bike is still a bicycle and not a motor bike. If you don't want to pedal, you buy a motorbike instead. It makes perfect sense to me.

However, it seems that the authorities are against using the power assistance in any of these ways.

I don't understand how you can make this statement. Pedelec bikes make people pedal to get assistance from the motor. If they don't pedal, the motor cuts out. Assistance does not equal substitution.

Cheers,Graeme

I don't really understand what you mean by "motor bike" in this context. I am quite sure that if you took the pedals off an electric bicycle and offered it to a burly leather clad motorbike rider and told him it was now a motor bike, he would laugh in your face. I do not see how pedaling is such an important issue. If you don't pedal a bicycle, it is still a bicycle, simply one not being pedaled. Does a bicycle become a motor bike if it has disc brakes?

As to "substitution", a motor is still assisting a bicycle rider if it allow him/her to take a break from pedaling every now and again, and let the motor run things while they rest. later on they can resume pedaling. Anyway, why does it have to be assistance (in your sense of the word) only? Why does the sky fall in if the rider stops pedaling? Its still the same rider, same bike, same speed. Why deliberately restrict something just for the sake of restriction without any other purpose?

People seem to be hung up on this pedal issue - the bicycle has pedals, so they should be used, right? So let the bicycle be powered without using pedals - so what if it is now technically a motor bike under the law? Create a new class of low-powered under 250 watt motorbikes. Whats the problem with that? Let people take the pedals off their 200watt ebikes. Why should anyone care? Who does it hurt? They don't seem to have a problem with this in the USA or Canada or New Zealand. Or in fact, in Australia at the moment! There are plenty of people using ebikes here that use a throttle. The sky does not seem to have fallen in quite yet.

Please explain to me how a non pedelec bicycle is somehow more dangerous than a pedelec one? If two riders of the same weight are riding on two otherwise identical ebikes at the same speed along the same stretch of road, one is pedaling and one is not - in what way is the pedaling rider better or safer than the non pedaling one? And if its not a safety issue, then what is the purpose of it?

We seem to me to be obsessed with regulation. Let those who like to pedal do so, and those that don't can use the throttle and give their legs a rest. Its nice to have freedom of choice. Its supposedly what a free country is all about. We have the technology to give people this choice, so why remove it?

Is it a requirement that powered bikes cut assistance when not pedalling. I have heard this before but am sure that I have had some pass me by at more than coasting speed with the rider just sitting. Though it may only be petrol motored ones.

Though I admit to sometimes feeling a little annoyed (even superior, my bad) at people seeming to use them purely as an unlicensed moped, I am happy for others to use them - there are benefits to the rider and to society other than fitness. Indeed, my other half would be a prime candidate for one.

As a commuting option, most other forms of getting to places does not require us to carry towels and clothes and find a shower at the other end. And speed limiting at least stops them from simply being a poor substitute for a moped.

ColinOldnCranky wrote:Is it a requirement that powered bikes cut assistance when not pedalling. I have heard this before but am sure that I have had some pass me by at more than coasting speed with the rider just sitting. Though it may only be petrol motored ones.

Though I admit to sometimes feeling a little annoyed (even superior, my bad) at people seeming to use them purely as an unlicensed moped, I am happy for others to use them - there are benefits to the rider and to society other than fitness. Indeed, my other half would be a prime candidate for one.

As a commuting option, most other forms of getting to places does not require us to carry towels and clothes and find a shower at the other end. And speed limiting at least stops them from simply being a poor substitute for a moped.

It is not currently a requirement for ebikes to be pedelec controlled - this is part of the new proposed revisions. Most current ebikes are either throttle controlled or both.

I cannot see any reason why an electric bicycle should not be used as a low powered moped. Why not? It helps the environment. So what if the Government loses some road tax revenue? If it encourages people to help save the planet, wheres the problem? And so what if some bicycle riders get jealous of the non-pedaling ebike rider - they can always buy one themselves! And if the average bicycle rider does not approve of the idea of bicycles that are not pedaled, then they have the freedom of choice not to buy or use one. Its a win-win situation.

As I have stated elsewhere in this forum, I believe the proposed and current regulations are designed with a view to crippling ebikes using regulations disguised as safety regulations, so as to limit their appeal, in order to protect the revenue stream from road tax / petrol revenue, and to protect the income of the corporations that make profits from cars and motorbikes and who fund/control (to some extent) the government. Consider what would happen if people took to ebikes in vary large numbers. The loss of revenue from petrol tax alone would cause problems for the government.

Comedian wrote:250w is enough for an electric bike IMHO. That's enough to give a really good boost and make pedalling a bike effortless. Isn't that enough? I think the proposed rules are good.

It may well be enough if you are someone who does not have a knee injury, and can pedal continuously - but for those who do, a bike where the motor is operated by pedaling might be a tad disappointing. The electric bike laws really need to be framed to cater for everyone - and not everyone is lucky enough to be young and fit.

Actually I thought one of the main reasons for ebikes in the first place was to encourage people who did not at present ride bikes to start doing so. Many of these are older riders with health issues.

Have you ever seen an electric wheelchair that only goes when the invalid in the chair starts pedaling?

So ... I'm confused here. What you want is an electric vehicle with an unlimited amount of power/speed that people don't have to pedal? You want to be able to use them on bicycle infrastructure? Most importantly, you don't want to have to pay rego for them?

It sounds as though what you want is well and truly available now in terms of e-scooters and electric wheel chairs.

stolennomenclature wrote: Does a bicycle become a motor bike if it has disc brakes?

No, it becomes a motorbike when you add a motor.

As to "substitution", a motor is still assisting a bicycle rider if it allow him/her to take a break from pedaling every now and again, and let the motor run things while they rest. later on they can resume pedaling. Anyway, why does it have to be assistance (in your sense of the word) only? Why does the sky fall in if the rider stops pedaling? Its still the same rider, same bike, same speed. Why deliberately restrict something just for the sake of restriction without any other purpose?

...

So let the bicycle be powered without using pedals - so what if it is now technically a motor bike under the law?

It's an important distinguishing issue because if you aren't pedalling, you're on a motorbike. Motorbikes must not use shared paths and must be registered to use the road, so an electric bike without pedal assistance is breaking laws and endangering others. "Assistance" is not my sense of the word: it's the laws' sense of the word. Pedelec bikes use the motor to assist the rider to power their bicycle, not replace the rider as the power source.

Why restrict the definition of a pedelec bike? Because one is an electrically assisted bicycle, the other is an electric motorbike (or electric moped). One offers incentive to resume pedalling while the other lets a less able rider get about without using petrol. Why would a rider "resume pedalling" if the motor can make their ride effortless?

Please explain to me how a non pedelec bicycle is somehow more dangerous than a pedelec one?

Pedelec bikes are generally professionally built, high quality units with the appropriate braking capacity and structural integrity to travel at the expected speeds you'll get from an electric boost. Allowing any backyard cowboy to drop a motor onto any bike usually results in the cheapest possible BSO (bicycle shaped object) travelling at three times the speed it's suited to. Doubt me? Have a look at the petrol powered BSOs running around the place. They are literally death traps.

Let those who like to pedal do so, and those that don't can use the throttle and give their legs a rest. Its nice to have freedom of choice. Its supposedly what a free country is all about. We have the technology to give people this choice, so why remove it?

My "small" electrike will peak out with unassisted motor (ie I'm not pedalling) at 16 km/h, yet the last time I rode to Perth and back (just over 50 km) I averaged nearly 18 km/h. Even with my injured feet and knees and a decrepit 61 year old body I can still pedal (unassisted) at 25 km/h or more on the flat (while carrying the batteries, motor and photovoltaic panels). I really only use the motor to climb the last hill of the day (or to be more accurate to climb it more quickly - the motor reduces the climb-time by half or more).

That's what electric assisted pedaling is.

Plus I carry my own photovoltaic panels on the back of the trike which help to keep my battery charged. If I had a bigger motor, the panels wouldn't be powerful enough and I'd probably need to plug into the mains to recharge. So by not having too big a motor, I'm being VERY green, but still traveling quite quickly.

Joe

To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracyBertrand Russell

Comedian wrote:250w is enough for an electric bike IMHO. That's enough to give a really good boost and make pedalling a bike effortless. Isn't that enough? I think the proposed rules are good.

It may well be enough if you are someone who does not have a knee injury, and can pedal continuously - but for those who do, a bike where the motor is operated by pedaling might be a tad disappointing. The electric bike laws really need to be framed to cater for everyone - and not everyone is lucky enough to be young and fit.

Actually I thought one of the main reasons for ebikes in the first place was to encourage people who did not at present ride bikes to start doing so. Many of these are older riders with health issues.

Have you ever seen an electric wheelchair that only goes when the invalid in the chair starts pedaling?

So ... I'm confused here. What you want is an electric vehicle with an unlimited amount of power/speed that people don't have to pedal? You want to be able to use them on bicycle infrastructure? Most importantly, you don't want to have to pay rego for them?

It sounds as though what you want is well and truly available now in terms of e-scooters and electric wheel chairs.

Canada has a 500 watt limit - that sounds reasonable to me as a minimum. That's just over half a horsepower. Most very small motorbikes put out over 3 h.p., or six times as much, and weigh a heck of a lot more. So there is no real danger of a 500 watt bicycle breaking the sound barrier or anything. A 500 watt bicycle would still only do a maximum of a little under 30kph on level ground with no headwind. Many human powered bikes can do this or slightly better, so its still within the envelope of normal human power bike performance. The only real difference would be that the electric motor would'nt get tired, but then the battery would run flat which I guess is the ebike equivalent.

As to the pedaling, many cyclist seem to be hung up on this for reasons that are beyond me. What's so wonderful about pedaling? No other vehilce on the road require pedaling. Personally, I can take it or leave it. Many times when I ride an o-bike (ordinary bike) I coast when I can, down hills for example, or when I have a tailwind. pedaling is nice (and healthy) but so is taking a break and coasting. Some of my favourite moments riding a bike are those rare periods when I can coast. So far, I have not been arrested for coasting. I fail to see why it would be such a sin to let the motor do the work occasionally and indulge in a bit of powered coasting, or is that just me?

The most annoying thing for me is that apparently the main if not sole reason behind the RTA's insistence on Pedelec is purely to make it easier to prevent manufacturers making devices that are not really bicycles, in other words fitting vestigial pedals to what are essentially small motorbikes in size and weight. I think it is good in principal where possible to make a law easier to enforce, but only if it can be done without mangling the law out of all recognition. If that cannot be done, as in this case, then I think the authorities should just bite the bullet and deal with the increased difficulty in enforcement somehow. For example, they could easily mandate a weight limit on PAPC's, such as 40kg with batteries for Bicycles and 50Kg for tricycles, or something similar. They could also mandate a minimum distance between the pedals, to eliminate the ultra wide vestigial pedals on some scooters. It might be more complex, but then these people are supposedly experts at doing this sort of thing. They should be able to handle it. Better that they have a slightly more difficult time with enforcement and the public get a better class of vehicle, then disadvantage the public and cause of green transport simply just to make life a bit easier for the enforcement authorities. Did'nt a famous member of Government famously state that life was'nt meant to be easy?

I've hung back on this thread stoelnnomenclature waiting for it to die but you seem not to what it to. So...

Essentially what you are asking/demanding is to shift from an arbitrary 200W. But all you propose is another arbitrary setting. Plus a growing list of further arbitrary settings. Your arbitrary settings are no more logical or defensible than the existing ones.

There are choices. Yes, they cost money. Yes, they have extra obligations. Yes, some people are less able to afford such options. This is life and there is nothing special about cycling on shared and public space that warrants exemptions from the realities of life - for you or the rest of us.

And really people have responded to your thoughts. I can't see anything more being said that has not already been said. This thread should now go the way of the Norwegian Blue. Please.

200w is ample power for an ebike that uses cycling infrastructure. 200w constant power is better than roughly 90% of cyclists could generate.

500w constant power is better than most procyclists.

Last time I put out 500w for 1 minute, I was chasing down a friend up a 4% grade, I passed him doing 42kmh.

IMHO 500w constant power equals close to constant 50kmh on the flat

I for one don't want to share cycling infrastructure, (bike paths etc) with electric motorcycles that hammer along at 50kmh.

I would expect the people most interested in 500w eCycles are not people looking to use it as a bicycle for short trips, but people looking at it as a replacement for their car or motorcycle because they lost their licence and they need transport. Are those the people you want riding at 50kmh down shared paths with joggers, prams, kids on bikes and other challenges?

500w motor would equate to a faster speed. I've read online somewhere of a person with 500w "bike" in Canberra that does somewhere around 60kph unassisted.

But it depends upon how the motor is geared. Joe's small trike with 200w motor will only do 16kph on flat. My 200w motor will do 25kph unassisted on the flat. If I were to put an 8fun 200w motor designed for a 24" wheel into my 700c wheel it would do 35kph. Of course these three options would all have very different hill-climbing ability. I've not tried it but I'd guess that the third one would be unsuitable in hilly Sydney.

ColinOldnCranky wrote:I've hung back on this thread stoelnnomenclature waiting for it to die but you seem not to what it to. So...

This is life and there is nothing special about cycling on shared and public space that warrants exemptions from the realities of life - for you or the rest of us.

And really people have responded to your thoughts. I can't see anything more being said that has not already been said. This thread should now go the way of the Norwegian Blue. Please.

In other words life sucks, and we should just accept that and not try to do anything to improve it. I wonder if that attitude of yours is why life sucks in the first place. Me, I would rather try and improve it. It certainly can only really imrpove - it could hardly be much worse.

Why are you so anxious that this thread should go away? Don't you have any will power? All you have to do is ignore it. It surely can't be that hard.

I could of course use your own argument against you, and remind you that having threads you don't like is part of the reality of life, and why should you be considered special and excused from it. But I won't - that would be unfair.

stolennomenclature wrote:I freely acknowledge that no one seems to agree with me, and that everyone would like electric bikes to have really small and weak motors, and to be as useless as possible. I give up.

You've just twisted people's words. Very very naughty!

People never objected to electric motor and certainly weren't promoting "really small" and "weak" motors. Sustained 250W is pretty decent power for a C/D grade club rider and takes a good year or two to train up to.

stolennomenclature wrote:I freely acknowledge that no one seems to agree with me, and that everyone would like electric bikes to have really small and weak motors, and to be as useless as possible. I give up.

End of thread!

Yeah well I'm sorry! It just seems that what you want is available now. You don't want to pedal so why not buy an electric scooter? Why are you hung up on your electric scooter having to resemble a bike? I don't understand why you want strap a huge motor and nuclear powerplant to a bicycle?

I started out with "Kermit" and a 200w elation kit. It was pretty good. With a bit of pedalling it could get around quite well, and was a decent help up hill. A guy at work rides a bike fitted with one of these and he's been using his for years.

Yes, I'm probably against the concept of a 500w motor. The reason is that with my 200w one if you relied on it heavily I could flatten the battery on my 25k commute even with pedalling. So how big would the battery need to be to feed a 500w motor? Really big! Huge in fact. And why? Why not just buy an electric scooter?

One of the last rides I had on my bike with the kit fitted I had a bit of a lightbulb moment. I got totally toasted by two roadies going up a hill. I pedalled for all I was worth, and cracked the throttle wide open and I couldn't catch those dudes. This made me realise that it's all about power to weight. They were light fellas, and their bikes didn't have like 10kg of electrics strapped to them. There were other reasons, but I ended up taking the kit off the bike. I was a little slower initially, but not by much at all. I realised that taking 10kg off the bike meant that by me pedalling I wasn't too much worse off.

So, by fitting a 500w motor to a bike, and lots and lots of batteries, heavier wheels to support the weight (better bolt it to a sturdy frame) you'll have a heavy bike. Really heavy... like 40kg. Once you do this... you're right.. pedalling is going to be like useless. Why not just by an electric scooter?

So, why don't you just buy an electric scooter? Is it that you don't want to pay rego? You want to blast down bike paths?

stolennomenclature wrote:Seems a shame to miss a great opportunity to turn a bicycle into a healthy, green, valid transportation system, as opposed to a purely recreational activity.

I agree with this. The whole point of an electric bike is that its not oil and petrol powered. What is the point of crippling the choices and limiting the potential of them. I don't want to avoid rego either. I would happily pay a fee for a decent electric bike. And as far as weight - Lithium batteries can power a larger motor without being heavy. I dont believe a bike with a 500 watt motor would be very safe but 200 watt is a bit weak and not really practical for hilly areas. In this day and age we need to encourage green powered transport not limit it. Lets get more people on bikes, whatever their age or circumstance.

Nobody wrote:That's why the authorities have settled on 250W. So what's the problem?

Ah I'm in Australia, the limit is 200W here - That's the problem. And you miss the point - bikes should be made for all situations - its a potential alternate transport to fossil fuel powered vehicles - Electric powered transport on a vehicle that you can use for practical and recreational pursuits - that is easy to acquire for most people - and is not limited to a single format. That sounds like a better idea than keeping a push bike a push bike.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.